list in directory join our network! affiliate login  
Custom Search
GET OUR FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTERS!
Daily and Weekly Editions • Articles • Alerts • Expert Advice • Learn More
Search Workipedia:  
« Go Back

Section 1983

General

A person states a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 if he alleges that the defendant deprived him of a constitutional right while acting “under color” of state law.

Specifically, § 1983 provides that:

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

Limitation Period and Filing Requirements

In actions under Section 1983, a court must ascertain the analogous underlying cause of action under state law and apply the applicable statute of limitations. There is no requirement to file with the EEOC or administrative agencies before instituting a Section 1983 action in court.

Jurisdiction

In order to state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege a violation of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, and that such violation was committed by a person acting under the color of state law.

Remedies and Damages

Section 1983 permits victims of employment discrimination to obtain a jury trial at which both equitable and legal relief, including compensatory and, under certain circumstances, punitive damages may be awarded. Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc., 421 U.S. 454 (1975).

More Information

Section 1983 Articles

Lawyer Login: Workipedia • EL Match

Auto-login Show name as online

Forgot your password?I Want To Participate!

Workipedia Navigation

Our Editors:

Most Active Contributors:

How To Contribute

Stats:

  • Page Views: 235587
  • Logged in Attorneys: 0
  • Total guests: 45

Ogletree Deakins | Indiana | Indiana Enacts Right-to-Work Law: Becomes the Only Right-to-Work State in the Central Midwest (February 02, 2012)

Littler Mendelson, P.C. | New Mexico | Santa Fe Local Ordinance Sets Country's Highest Minimum Wage Requirement (February 02, 2012)

Littler Mendelson, P.C. | California | A Moving Target: The California DLSE Modifies Again Its FAQs on California's New Wage Notice Required for Hourly Employees (February 01, 2012)

Jackson Lewis LLP | Indiana | Indiana Adopts Right-to-Work Law (February 03, 2012)

Littler Mendelson, P.C. | California | Is Rounding of Employee Time Entries Legal in California?--California Supreme Court Orders Appellate Court to Decide (January 31, 2012)

Littler Mendelson, P.C. | California | California Court of Appeal Finds Employees Are Exempt Under California's Commissioned Sales Exemption (January 31, 2012)

Ford & Harrison LLP | New York | New York's Wage Theft Prevention Act Requires Notice to Employees (January 30, 2012)

Ford & Harrison LLP | California | Class-Action Antitrust Complaint Alleging an Unlawful Employer "No-Poaching" Conspiracy Appears to Have Survived a Motion to Dismiss (January 30, 2012)

Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP | Delaware | Delaware Court of Chancery Issues Guidelines for Attorneys (January 31, 2012)

Littler Mendelson, P.C. | Pennsylvania | Pennsylvania Court Holds That Trustees May File Mechanics’ Lien to Obtain Delinquent Contributions to Health and Pension Funds (January 30, 2012)